Experience Project iOS Android Apps | Download EP for your Mobile Device

You Don't Know The Truth And Other Limitations Of Our Species

Lets shed a little Zen and address some statements which I base my opinion on and claims on !

Claim One:

"The Bible is evidence of what is in the Christian doctrine. The Bible, however, is based on faith. Faith is not based in evidence."

This isn't all that true is it?

Christians believe that "the Bible" is either the word of God or inspired by the word God. They also freely admit that its not necessarily the complete works of God.
Christians do not deny the "dead sea scrolls"
Christians don't all follow every aspect of the bible
Christians also have different versions of the Bible ( see Catholicism, Moravian and many different branches of Christianity )
Christians also talk about there being many gospels which were not included in the bible but, which agree with the gospels which are included;

Christian Doctrine actually varies greatly from denomination to denomination and yet all Christians have agreement in the Bible (for the most part)... how could this be possible? It could not! And it IS not.

If on e would like to actually learn the definition of Christian Doctrine they would realize how ignorant the above claim is. What the Bible provides is what is considered " essential christian doctrine" but it does not contain all christian doctrine.

However, domination's may have additional texts which they also view as Doctrine and this is most frequently the rule than the exception.
(see Catholicism, Mormonism, Amish, Moravian, Lutherans etc...)

The best way to know what "Christians believe" is to ACTUALLY ASK THE CHRISTIANS YOU ARE ACCUSING.

Attributing assertions and behaviors and doctrines onto all Christians and holding all Christians accountable for what some Christians might do or might believe ... that sounds pretty prejudiced and ignorant.

To make your assertions true and standing in your own requirements of what is "valid" you require proof.

Trust or confidence in someone or something.
Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

Faith doesn't lack "evidence" it is just belief based on something different than "proof".

I hope we do not need to discuss the differences between evidence and of proof but fear we might so just in case.

Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truthfulness of an assertion.

Giving or procuring evidence is the process of using those things that are either (a) presumed to be true, or (b) were themselves proven via evidence, to demonstrate an assertion's truth. Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof.

Proof is
A proof is sufficient evidence or an argument for the truth of a proposition.

In the areas of epistemology and theology, the notion of justification plays approximately the role of proof, while in jurisprudence the corresponding term is evidence, with burden of proof as a concept common to both philosophy and law.

So what does this all mean? In terms of proper debate it means that Faith is based on evidence in the manner of justification and when a person feels they have enough "justifications" for their "beliefs" that is "proof" in terms of religion, and this is what allows for valid faith in a belief or religion.

A lot of argument revolves around Christians not having enough proof or not providing proof ... when a Christians provides what they believe is proof a non christian quickly asserts it isn't sufficient proof. This goes back and forth with each side leveling claims and refutations of "proof"... while most know that in debates regarding theology proof cannot be scientific, mathematical, etc... trying to assert that it does is asinine, the very nature of what is being debated does not allow for proof in terms other than justifications.

You can not prove leaves are green with mathematical proofs... You can also not prove the leaf isn't green with mathematical proof....One must use observations and consensus to prove the color of the leaf.

One cannot debate Religion if they do not understand HOW to debate religion.
A lot of people who try also fall prey to all manner of logical fallacy in debates regarding this subject, Lets address the ones which the statement implores to come to its conclusions.

"The Bible is evidence of what is in the Christian doctrine. The Bible, however, is based on faith. Faith is not based in evidence."
Affirming the consequent/Denying the antecedent
Many Questions/Claims
Misplaced concreteness!
Proof by assertion,
Argumentum ad lapidem
bare assertion
Circular reasoning

But what it all comes down to on both sides is argumentum ad ignorantia.

Of course some will cry “foul” and try to enter into debating me using the evidences of science and the proof of nature, and will claim that Science has proven that Christianity and therefore their God doesn’t exist. We can disregard my previous assertion and pretend that scientific proof cannot be used to either prove or disprove religion because it measures and deals with nature, okay fine, but science hasn’t always been all the scientific now has it?

Science at one time believed fossils to be animals in “suspended animation”, AIDS to be “homosexual cancer”, the world to be flat, the world to be the center of the universe…

]Science is no panacea to finding “truth”.

…and herein lies the paradox and limitations of it all “ Truth is Proof of Truth” yet, Truth does not require Proof to be Truth. Truth is in itself Truth… and not reliant on anything other than its self.

What we falsely assert is “truth” is really just beliefs based on what we believe to be facts or justifications, and agreement that these “facts” are …dum dum dun …TRUTH.

And herein lies my position, we can neither prove nor disprove The existence of any “Ultimate Truth” and more so trying to at this point in our evolution as a species seemingly is not possible.

I think we are best to focus our attentions on things we are capable of comprehending, trying to force others to either prove or disprove something of which we cannot even comprehend is a exercise in futility.

We don’t spend our time trying to teach physics to our dogs for very good reasons they aren’t capable of understanding it and in addition/because of that, it is not useful for the dog.

Why can’t we recognize that trying to force conversions of belief based on unknowable “truths” is no different?

Vivagalore Vivagalore 31-35, F 8 Responses Aug 19, 2012

Your Response


"Attributing assertions and behaviors and doctrines onto all Christians and holding all Christians accountable for what some Christians might do or might believe ... that sounds pretty prejudiced and ignorant."
>At no point have I done so. In fact, I've often pointed out that Christians do not all have the same beliefs.

You seem to think I have a problem with Christianity. Atheists seem to think I have a problem with Atheism, when I tell them off for their Christian bashing bigotry. People may believe as they wish, but when they attempt to force others to follow their unproved belief system, or talk down to people who do not share that unproved belief systems, they are spreading hate without just grounds. That means they are doing so with prejudice.

Flo please then stop forcing your opinions upon my stories from last year

"flobadine<br />
"The best way to know what "Christians believe" is to ACTUALLY ASK THE CHRISTIANS YOU ARE ACCUSING."<br />
>I didn't have to ask. The people I accuse already posted prejudice. I pointed it out and I quoted the post as evidence."<br />
<br />
<br />
excuse me but the posts ive seen have not proven anything and judging a person on a single statement or a group they join is ignorant.<br />
<br />
your falling prey to more of your delusions and fallacies...Fallacy of composition – assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole

I reply and refer to the very prejudice I'm pointing out. I have yet to be fallacious as much as you'd like me to be. Keep trying.

FloItAll everyone quit this discussion a year ago. We aren't interested in 'keep trying'... Go play with your pennies or find something new to do.

Hey flo! What happened to the leather sports jacket? It was so spiffy!

Well easy, christains like to throw the bible around like its a kite, so if they can do that then athiest should be able to. One side should not have different rights than the other. If athiest want to try to dispprove something then its not going to change what I believe or what any other christains believe. So on that note why do christains get all bent out of shape when somebody tries to dissprove something? You can chalk it up any way you like but it comes down to two things: fear and insecurity on both sides.

Did you read my post?


Your statement seems a bit off the actual subject...however your strawmaning the issue and justifing your ad ignorantiam and Inconsistent assertions with the Tu quoque fallacy.

I would love to know some ways you think the bible can be used 'against' Christians. I'm not judging I'm simply curious!

ok well that never came out of my statement, I mentioned the bible because your article basically states that neither can be proven, I just said athiest have a right to disprove as much as the bible thumping christains like to throw their beliefs in their faces do also. But since you made a comment saying something I never said ill answer: Easy you get a bible and then you hit them with it.

Actually you said "Well easy, christains like to throw the bible around like its a kite, so if they can do that then athiest should be able to. "

This I assumed was you saying if Christians use the bible against atheists then atheists should get to use it against the Christians.... Did I misunderstand your statement ?

Your hitting them with it, Is pretty hilarious, I give you credit for that! In terms of the bible it's best use is as a tool to smack people with or a doorstop ....LOL

Hmmm I didn't insult you. I pointed out the issues with your claim. You didn't want to debate the information contained in my post so you accuse me of being inbred (ad hominem attack which flobadine claims is a behavior only engaged in by bigots ) .... I wonder if you would also agree calling someone inbred whom you don't know and have no justifications for also pretty ignorant. Just so you know, a person who points out the logical fallacies of anothers 'argument' isn't being insulting. Furthermore no amount of a person being rude is proof or a logical conclusion that a person is inbred. In fact the criteria for inbred is being the result from the mating of two genetically related parents. Your claim is simply Non-Sequitur, False Analogy and Red herring fallacies

All I was saying is if christains can throw religion in peoples faces and base everything around the bible, the opposing side can do the same thing in the fact that they should be allowed to express their views and opinions as well. Oh and the bible can be used against christains, the bible is a very violent boom that wad written FOR that time period. Look at www. evilbible .com.

I think everyone should be able to express their beliefs... I didn't say that anyone shouldnt be allowed to express their belief.

Have you ever seen fighting Christians with the bible ever work?

7 More Responses

I only got as far as the Pythagorean theorem with my dog. After that she was stumped. She fetches a mean ball though.

Get that dog a tutor!

Ahhh but you were the first to call me ignorant before I said something. Its ignorant to insult someone who never meant to insult you in the first place. Its not a debate that I was saying, therefore only my opinion and not facts. My opinion was if christains can throw their religion in peoples faces the opposite side can do the same. It was not a debate but my opinion, you tried turning it into a devate because MY opinion disagreed with yours :)

The story isn't about being able to openly be atheists or Christians.
I also didn't call you ignorant ... I think you might be confused as to my reference to YOUR ASSERTIONS (not YOU ) being a "ad ignorantiam" fallacy which is asserting a specific belief is true because we don’t know that it isn’t true.... It wasn't me calling you a name!

Oh ok well im happy you didnt call me ignorant and I wasnt saying the belief wasnt true I just said two sides can do the same thing.

What does my dog and the Pythagorean Theorem have to do with all this? Or did you find out that he has a degree in psychology and perhaps could help?

Yeah but goliath I added a bikini beach pic for you

good thing you did that after I read it or your disclaimer never would have gotten the attention it deserved....

i picked it out special for you.... your dog catches balls, so does bikini girl!

5 More Responses

preach on, sister!

Very informative. <br />
<br />
Loving the part of having disclaimer placed in comment section with a clear understanding on whom this is not for and what comments are worthy of being posted and which comments can just **** off.

I only just wrote the story so I could post the disclaimer in the comment section. Lmao


My dog just told me she isn't interested in physics anyway.<br />
But she is totally down with theories like Evolution.

I love my dogs and THAT is the TRUTH (no evidence needed )

&lt;---- doesnt understand how Xtians deny evolution because it defies God as Creator..... when Genesis 2 pretty much talks about evolution...." formed the man from the dust of the ground" LMAO

This post is not for "everyone" ... it is for people who find it worth reading entirely and have information, critique or questions about its subject matter<br />
<br />
<br />
If your going to post something about how you didnt read this all or that is was too long or any other sort of reply that adds absolutely nothing to the issues contained within this post... Don't!<br />
<br />
If you want to debate something which is not mentioned or inferred by this article, Don't! <br />
(find a better location for your post I am sure there are plenty)<br />
<br />
If you going to post something that doesnt really relate to the post but is either a compliment to my super skillz of bullshittery and epicness or is really funny.... i love you and post away!


no pictures of nearly naked hand standers.....this is not truly interesting with out them. AND, nearly naked hand standers do illustrate the importance of knowing physics.

@ goliath I will correct the mistake immediately !