deschainXIX wrote:Derpybunneh, look at what you're saying. Observe it, dissect it, and think about it for yourself. FOR YOURSELF--that's the important part.
"Scripture is proof." "The book is not a lie."
These are dogmas that have been drilled into your skull so deep that you do not question them anymore. They are preconceived notions, pure ideas that have no evidence or reasoning behind them to state that they are true. You're saying, "I believe what I believe because the scripture is correct, and the scripture is correct because the scripture is correct," and, "The book is not a lie because I have lived my entire life by the book, and it's fallacy would mean my entire life has been a lie."
If we can accept things without evidence, where are we exactly? If we can accept without evidence, why do you discount Islam? Or Methodism? Or Hinduism? I can make whatever claim I like, and you cannot refute me because having evidence doesn't matter to you. The Easter bunny is real. I can fly like Superman (but only when no one is looking). Et cetera...
Do you not see the flaw in your mindset?
[ Post made via iPhone ]
Plah, science. You must have evidence for everything. Blech. Well, somethings things are true, but there is no physical evidence for it. The evidence comes from a spiritual source. These ideas aren't drilled very deep in my head, because I still question them or think I want to advert from this religion of mine. But I believe the book Joseph Smith translated is true, without much physical evidence. You don't need physical evidence to believe.
That's way science is annoying. You must have physical evidence; seeing is believing. < blech blech blech.
My belief is seeing is NOT believing.