cuchulain

Not knowing, or being unable to know, leaves the default of either untrue or don't care...for me. I can't know, given current info, whether exodus really happened as claimed. Therefor i reject the claim. A claim is not true until disproven...it is true when proven, to me.

Left off the 'genuine interest'...guess you can't rightly claim atheists have no genuine interest and that equally defeats your point so its. best not to admit you were wrong, eh?

Lets see how long that lasts...

Yep. Back to refuting the logic...

Dan said it precisely...but now that we have also agreed to what he said he will go back to refuting it... even though he said it first.

You dont believe in zeus even though you can't disprove he exists... Your logic is clearly flawed.

Look at dan's posting history vs atheists and in conjunction with fellow believers. His comprehension level is magically different, he gives believers the benefit of the doubt, and tries...TRIES noticably not to insult them. Atheists have repeatedly pointed out the insult that his comprehension just cannot grasp, he will disagree with things he himself has said if we say it, and he continually plies the SAME insult... Yep. That's the definition of bias.

😂

Disbelief: The inability to accept something that is true. This is the insult you repeatedly bait with, dan. That we cant handle the truth. Time to grow up, man.

My view does change. I consider it wisdom to change when shown to be wrong. Your quote is in error, for example. It speaks for all atheists as if we all believe that. But your view doesnt seem to allow for change when shown to be in error. Just my observations.

Various unknown writers and some of the books were left out...they like to gloss over that.

The bible isn't cohesive because the main character, existing separate from time, changes halfway through. As does the message. The theme? In the beginning books, god is all about killing if you dont follow the law, lots of stonings. Bears maul 42 kids because one made fun of his prophet, but 41 did nothing and still bit it...and the bible doesnt specify the perp being one of the dead. From that to a theme of forgivness, the opposite of revenge or justice? No...not a consistent character at all.

Seems like a faulty assumption.

Had to have that last word 😂

Can you define argument? It's classically meant as a person's point in a debate, so when you say that the argument is getting silly, I responded by saying it takes two...unless you want to play the unwitting participant. But you complained about the silly argument...then kept going. I think that is silly as well. Or do you need to have the last word in a silly debate?