Skeptics and Unbelievers- Would you be more willing to listen if...?

Question

The people trying to argue with you were not answering your questions with quotations from a source document you put no credence in? Basically I'm asking, would you prefer to argue with a Christian on your own grounds of reason rather than arcane Biblical verses. Or, is the concept of faith too irrational to be argued with in any form?

I ask just for my own reference and use, I'm really not trying to be sarcastic or anything.

Answer 1

I think so. I think that's probably the basis of the arguement. You really hit the nail on the head. If non believers don't believe in the Bible, why are you going to use something that that person doesn't believe in ANYWAY to further prove your point?! That's why the non believers get so irritated. Use something else to prove that the BIBLE is right. We'd (I include myself because I consider myself spiritual but not religious and I follow no particular faith, more philosophy based) like to see you be able to back up everything to ONE source.
Many evolutionists believe this way as well. A lot of non believers/athiests/agnostics want PROOF. They tend to think on more scientific, analytical and logical means. We tend to believe that everything starts from SOMEWHERE and you should be able to back up your claims with proof. Well, where's the PROOF that the BIBLE is the RIGHT answer and should be used as "the" source for all of life's questions and problems? Skeptics are skeptical of the Bible, so why would you use something that they are skeptical in, in order to further prove your point? If you want to prove your point, use something that is actually widely accepted as fact, not something that can be interpreted in a million different ways by a million different people. I myself like proof. I'm a science major and I like to see the scientific method worked out on hypotheses and suggestions. Show me the proof, show me that it's the same result every time the test is performed, and show me that it can't be interpreted a million different ways and that you still get the same end result every time, and then you have my attention.

Answer 2

R U kidding-I have learned so much from having some people place verse after verse of their belief quoted from their source that -I Just skip through it-I don't mind them using these references if they can do so constructively and do not sound like the same ol BS I have argued time and again-Jesus Wept-ok great-I don't care where it is in the Bible-but to try to use that as an answer to my question just shows me that this person is limited in their capacity to resolve the real question!

Answer 3

Quoting bible verses has to be one of the most annoying ways believers have tried to convert me...I've read the bible, know what it says, and don't need someone to tell me again. If they must argue with me, they can do so intelligently and I'll return the favor by carrying on a discussion (I pretty much ignore people who blindly quote scripture thinking it will mean anything to me). But, by now I've probably heard a variation of just about every decent (and junky) philosophical argument that exists for god...so I don't expect anyone to say something that changes my mind. Yet, I am willing to listen and share my thoughts.

Answer 4

The problem with that is.. Christians are programed that all answers are in the Bible. If you take the Bible away you have no context for belief.
Besides why argue? An arguement happens when one person doesn't care about what the other has to say...... Otherwise it would be a discussion..

Answer 5

To me, it's axiomatic that no belief can be justified if it's supported by neither reason nor evidence. Faith is the negation of this fundamental principle - it entails the view that a belief can be justified even if supported by neither reason nor evidence - but that is surely self-refuting, since by faith alone you could be justified in believing something to be both true and untrue at the same time, which is clearly nonsense, and shows that faith cannot justify belief.

So, it's indisputable that *only* reason and evidence are valid grounds for discussing and justifying beliefs.

Answer 6

If you are questioning the validity or existence of god and someone starts quoting from the bible, wouldn't that be the worst possible way to answer?? I mean they are offering what they think is proof but that is the very thing in question! I tend not to even read answers that quote scripture, because the person is plagiarizing and clearly not capable of coming up with their own answer.

Answer 7

That would be a nice change of pace.

I find conversations are much more meaningful when people are actually using their own words to describe their beliefs. I might think they are silly or ridiculous but I respect that a lot more than someone just giving me bible quotes or cutting and pasting a 30 page theological document.

Answer 8

To me blind faith is scary. And it's not like there aren't many rational believers out there. But the ones that quote their holy text (and take it literally) and use it as a justification for everything--without the rationalization that men wrote the bible and thus their biases and imperfections would transfer to this text--are scary in their inability to think for themselves. Plus, the bible has so many ambiguities and everyone's interpretation could be vastly different from one person to the next! I hate the line "It's in the bible so it's a fact."

Answer 9

I would just like to see one believer post a logically consistent argument, and not the same old discredited arguments that have been posted a thousand times. It amazes me that there are still Christians who think that saying "look all around you, creation is proof" accomplishes anything. Why can't one Christian, just one, give me a run for my money intellectually? It's always old and already refuted arguments.

Answer 10

I'd say I'm more willing to talk without Bible quotes because I don't believe it at all. Christians have plenty of valid arguements, just most all of them require faith.

Guys, we've got science. No, we don't have everything figured out, but we're also not going off an Almighty invisible guy to explain what we have YET to explain.