Yes. The basic structure is: "100% certainty is never possible, so 0% certainty is every bit as good, and in conditions of 0% certainty it is best to treat religious stories as if they were 100% true." Airtight logic.
-
-
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Many of the truly important things in life aren't "provable" in any meaningful sense.
-
Such as?
-
A sense of belonging, a worldview in which everything coheres, the experience of beauty, relationships, meaning, purpose and values.
-
There’s proof for the existence of all those things. Even though they’re mostly subjective.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"Denying the existence of God is as much a leap of faith as asserting it." *spittakes* God is an un-falsifiable claim, and asking people to prove a negative is intellectually dishonest. That article. Damn. I can FEEL the oozing desperation.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
he says, advocating for his tribe.
-
A great point...I often hear people complain about religious tribalism while imagining themselves independent of tribalism...laboring under the delusion of the immaculate perception.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If faith is just trust and love (which is basically what the author spent 4 paragraphs saying), then put your faith is something worthy of your trust and love. The god of Abraham has the temper of a child and the plot of the bible is super convoluted and discombobulated.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And for the fourth time, you're refuting something the article NEVER said. Big fan of your work, but this is so dishonest.
-
It’s the very first sentence of the piece

-
Please point out any dogmatic claim or even appeals to believe in dogmatic claims made in the article. The entire piece is full expressions of the author's own doubts.
-
If this isn’t dogma then I don’t know what is. He’s presenting elements of the
#Jesusmyth as fact.pic.twitter.com/0M2uxJOw4b
-
He prefaces his entire discussion of this particular story with "According to the Gospel of John". Throughout the article he's earnestly discussing what he admits are articles of faith. Not trying to command you to believe his tribe because he said so.
-
“According to ...” comes 11 paragraphs earlier and he’s clearly no longer referencing it since he quotes Forsyth and Barnes in the paragraphs immediately preceding. He uses biblical verse and scholars to support his views. That’s dogma
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I most disagree with his notion that reason can analyze modern physics. For me it’s definitely an act of faith ;-)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I used to think precisely like this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Dude, check out my hole, it doesn't even hurt to poke it - I'm, like, totally a zombie now!"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.