God said it, I believe it, that settles it..................?

Question

Isn't that is a preposterous answer to any question?

(PREPOSTEROUS: so foolish or pointless as to be worthy of scornful laughter)

Example:
1. God said it (No, YOU said god said it. Your bible was written by men WHO SAID god said it.)

2. I believe it (Sorry but just because a person believes in an invisible duck, doesn't mean their IS an invisible duck. )

3. That Settles it. (Not so fast....look at 1&2, we haven't settled anything yet.)

And now I will use the exact same argument and whacky logic to demonstrate my beliefs:

The sun in the sky isn't really a giant ball of burning gas....It's actually Ra, the sun god according to ancient egyptian scrolls. (He has the power to conceal his identity, that's why scientists can't see him)

Ra said it, I believe it, that settles it.

Now, how many of you believe that the sun is actually Ra?

sorry for the "is" at the top, sometimes I type too fast.

Kingreef7: You are a prime example. Why not just admit that the "god said it" answer is preposterous? You know it is. If you are soooo secure in your belief system, why not just admit it instead of questioning my motivation?

Answer 1

But the bible said that only this God was real.....stop busting my bubble!

And to Prophecy a few posts below... statistically people who are terminally sick and go to Rome to pray to God have 1% chance of recovering. Quite some statistics there.

Answer 2

it is of course... (preposterous that is)

especially if they are replying to a question from someone who is a strong atheist or even an agnostic.

that is why spiritual people aren't called to debate their faith but rather are instructed to be prepared to give an answer to anyone who asks them to give the reason for the hope they have in them.

it is just a sad state of affairs to see that so many so-called christians have not even read through a single book of the Bible.
(but that is not to say that people who bash "religious" people have done the same thing either and act as if they have read through the whole 66 or so books)

this just proves one thing, people have always debated about the "gods" and are continuing to do so...

until this is constant, people will always be searching for answers to their own questions...

and whatever answer a person believes in will ultimately stem from what his or her life questions are...

Answer 3

Gino,

I appreciate your frustration. The response he gave is less than persuasive--more a bumber sticker slogan. But when you think about it, don't we all process information in much the same fashion. So and so said it, I trust him, so I believe what he said and thus, for me, this issue is settled.

Let me give you an example on which we might both agree. On April 14, 1965, John Wilkes Booth shot Abraham Lincoln in the back of the head at Ford's Theatre (I'm not trying to trick anyone here, so if I got a date wrong or mispelled a name, its inadvertent). I think Mr. Robotham in my fifth grade class first told me this fact. I trusted him, because he was the tearcher at my school and my parents told me I would learn things at school. And as far as I was concerned, the issue was settled.

Even if you are an historian, you too would have to have learned this fact from someone telling you the fact (even if you read it on a piece of paper, even if it was an eyewitness account by John Wilkes Booth) and you believe the fact, because you trusted the source or sources. Unless you are actively researching this issue, I imagine this fact is also settled in your mind as truth.

Except in areas where we do independent research or we can actually reach out and physically sense something, we gain the great body of our knowledge through he or see said it, I believed it, and that settled it.

For example, I know my social security number, because I was told it and I saw it printed on a card (the number represents my social security number, but just because a card said it was my number, it doesn't mean it actually is my number), I believed it and for the most part, it's been a settled issue. We all have a wealth of scientific facts at our fingertips, but for the great majority of us, we know these facts, because we were told them, we trusted the person who told us those facts and thus we believed them, and from our view, those facts are settled in our minds as true.

In the Islamic religion, there is a large body of of traditions relating to the words and deeds of the prophet Muhammad. One way muslims attempt to guarantee the authenticty and accuracy of a particular tradition is they use something called the asnad or chain of authority.

It works something like this. I want to vouch for something that the prophet said. So I tell the person I am vouching to that I learned this fact from my grandfather who was an honest man. He learned this fact from his neighbor back in Medina who was an honest man and the brother-in-law of so-and-so. This neighbor was a respected, honest man known for truth telling. And he learned the fact from so-and-so who knew the prophet. We all know that so-and-so was trustworthy and spoke the truth. Hence, we can trust this bit of information to be accurate.

I think the police do something like that with evidence. There is a chain of custody and if you trust the links in the chain of custody, you trust the evidence as being authentic.

This is a very traditional way of learning information. Think of the Irish bard who memorized vast quantities of material and had sworn oaths to accurately impart the knowlege they memorized.

The reason why "God said it, I believed it, that settles it" is a bad method of persuading you is that you don't trust God. You don't have a grasp on how God transmitted that information to the speaker. And for you it doesn't settle it.]

But I don't find the answer itself ridiculous, rather it is just not a persuasive answer when directed at someone who does not have trust in God.

I will pray that you gain that trust over time. And I hope you continue your studies into religion whatever your motivations.

God bless,


Laura

P.S. Gino, I bet you got through two paragraphs of the above and then your eyes glazed over. You might even appreciate better why some would have me silent in Church. Cause she just talks and talks and talks.

=)

Answer 4

great logic, I agree 100% but they won't see it as logic nor will they see the flaw in their own logic. Religious beliefs are not logical.
You can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink.
Faith isn't about logic, it is about clinging to an idea that comforts the individual. It is about finding a way out of the chaos of everyday life-giving someone or something power over you and liking it.
Belief in something unprovable and purely theoretical is not new.
Using logic against the illogical is just frustrating for both sides of the argument.
Just my opinion

Answer 5

There's no invisible duck???? *pouts*

It settles it only for them and is the perfect dodge. They would probably save face if they just came out and said "I don't know" or not even bother answering the question. The question obviously cornered that person and they felt they had to answer, but couldn't come up with an actual answer.

Answer 6

if you had actually read the Bible which from your question I in all my prophetic glory (not) can say beyond a doubt you have not done, then what you propose might be worth trying to understand and I would ask to view your Ra's writtings I would read them and decide if they were inspired, but you do not make a credible case and have specified somewhere that I can get your book, movie whatever, and since I have read the Bible and found it to inspired I will stick to that.

Hail the FSM (flying sox monster) may he forever keep all the missing sox until we all arrive at the huge sock pile in the mystical unknown sock drawer.

Answer 7

Those of us who know our faith and the truth and facts and historical evidence behind it, don't hide behind Ra, we are prepared to give every man an answer for the faith that is in us. It's real, provable and as plain as the nose on your face for those who haven't hardened their hearts to it. Most naysayers here though won't even stop to consider our facts and numbers and prophecies came true, because they have hardened their hearts and are closed to the gospel. Even hateful and angry towards God, just like Pharoah was.

Answer 8

It used too i now discover it laughable some are claiming the bible is genuine whether that's not this word is a hallmark that they don't look to be attracted to communication and that they are definitely pwned plus consistent with a un-shown, re-edited, had words edited and been mistranslated e book by way of fact the muse of your awareness would not say lots stable approximately your awareness i don't see "case closed" yet I see many whine that that's their perception/opinion as though that provides them some immunity edit: I trust genuinely Funke "case closed" is a fashion of asserting their minds are closed - I definitely have in basic terms considered my first one the e book as information is effortless to mock as that makes harry potter, wellness practitioner who etc genuine as they have books approximately them and so as that they must be genuine too

Answer 9

The One True God said it, I believe it, but it is not settled.
It needs much learning to distinguish the Word of God form the writing or the saying of man. If you are not clear, you keep on wavering.
It needs much learning to distinguish sincere faith from blind belief. Otherwise, you continue to arrogantly talk nonsense. Evidently, you are not all-knowing, you must have a teacher to believe or you take your body as teacher?
Of course you are free to worship your body as your god. When you realize that your life is not settled, please rethink and start learning.

Answer 10

Good logical process of disproving the validity of an argument. However, one should not be an atheist because some Christians and other religions use such bad arguments.

At the same time, one should not be religious because of this argument.

I'm not preaching to either side, just agreeing.