Posted: Jul 18, 2017 7:28 am
by TopCat
Zadocfish2 wrote:So, once again I'm stuck. What do you guys think of such weirdly specific coincidences in a believer's life? Don't you think it's strange at all?

Since you ask, I think you really, really, really need to understand confirmation bias. Unfortunately, Christians are so conditioned to believe, that cognitive dissonance sets in before they're prepared to engage sufficient intellectual honesty.

My other thought is that if you can be swayed to and from your faith by such things, Revelation 3:16 maybe applies. And if you fell away before, Hebrews 6:4-6, although I've never met a Christian that has the guts to take that seriously.

Still liking 2 Timothy 3:16-17 quite so much?

Seriously, it's all just cherry picking (which obviously, I'm doing too to make the point) and confirmation bias.

Bottom line: if you want to be a Christian, you'll find a way of justifying the cherry picking. You even did it in your OP about Leviticus - you excluded its laws on the subjective basis that "clearly" it doesn't apply to modern Christians, and allowed yourself to opt out of anything you don't like in the NT by virtue of it not being "scripture".

Frankly, it's one of the weakest apologetics I've seen, and I've seen plenty.


Zadocfish2 wrote:The words themselves, I had some issues with (clearly Leviticus isn't meant to extend to modern Christians, and the epistle writers didn't consider their own work "scripture," seeing as they were just letters at the time, and a few other things). But, it just so happened that I got a response that was a word-for-word, properly-phrased answer to the question I had asked in prayer, on that exact day, at that exact time (after the daily verse switch at 9 pm).

Can't you see that you're even cherry picking the interpretation of the so-called "answer" you received?

You say yourself that you don't like the content, but choose to interpret the timing of the event as supernatural.

If it was God answering your question, don't you think he'd give you an answer that was true? Yet you reject the content (oh, noes, Leviticus doesn't apply, and the NT doesn't count either), and cite the timing instead.

It's bollocks, and detestably dishonest.