FTA:
There’s a difference between (1) explaining how you see things or how your worldview fits together and (2) making an argument with evidence to convince me to adopt your worldview. Said another way, the two options are explaining how you see it (explanation) vs. how I should see it (argument). Apologists sometimes focus on (1) and forget that the words coming out of their mouths are backed by zero evidence.
When christians are taught that their faith should be treated like fact and then they glorify faith without evidence there’s going to be some pretty big logic gaps.
Illustrations are a good example of this. They’re good at showing how the person making the illustration views the world, but they don’t actually prove anything about the world itself.
You have to be a pretty selfish person to try and take someone’s faith away from them. Some people take a lot from their faith.
With this in mind that is not the same as explaining that something is bad in a particular religion, and that the belief is held without foundation. So providing that religion is not affecting anyone but themselves, then let them crack on.
You have to be a pretty selfish person to try and take someone’s faith away from them. Some people take a lot from their faith.
Turnabout is fair play. I don’t challenge anyone’s faith unless they insist I have to share theirs.
Yep, I have to agree to that one.