You're terrible at making and interpreting analogies.

Fat guy walking down the hall and you have to go to one side or the other to let him by. If you've touched the wall with the wet paint sign you'll know which side you can safely go to. But going back to your original analogy of someone shouting "Duck" and someone just yelling duck, instead imagine someone yells "Heads up." Do you put your head down? Or do you look for the source of danger to make sure that when you take two steps to the left, you're not actually walking into the path of the falling object?

Your analogy was poor because there are any number of situations where it's preferable to act instinctually or act only after considering your options. There's no reason to be rash and to jump on a religious bandwagon when you have plenty of time to consider what you believe to be the most likely possibility.

How is it a fallacy? And who exactly are you trusting when you profess your faith? Your pastor? Certainly not Jesus, because you first must conclude that the bible is reliable and that God exists. Although I can see how you could use this when they teach children in Sunday School, mainly because they must simply go along with what they're taught since they're too young to really think on their own.

you want an example trusting other people?
assume you are standing in the middle between two christian churches of different denominations
from each comes a reverend/pastor/cleric and tells you: if you come to my church you will be saved but if you go into the other the devil will get your soul
now tell me whom you trust

This post was edited by brmv on Apr 25 2013 09:23pm

No I'm not.



This fat guy must be really huge right? Or is the hall just really small? You tell me what you would do if somebody yells "Heads up." Then tell me why that particular option is the best ever option for all time?

You do know that the point I'm making is that when somebody asks question after question and want to know all the details before hand, they are the ones who don't actually do what you ask of them?

It is those who don't know all the details yet trust the other person are the ones who would do what is asked of them and their questions will be answered as they go.



It is a fallacy because it is not directly related to the point we were discussing.

Imagine this scenario: A woman is chatting with her husband and she believes that men should always open the door for women who are carrying groceries. The husband asks: "Why?" She replies: "Because it is the polite thing to do."
The husband then asks: "Why is it the polite thing to do?" Then she replies: "Because it shows how kind and caring they are, this morning when I had all the groceries you didn't open the car door for me."
Husband: "I couldn't open the car door for you because you never asked me to open the car door."
Wife: "I shouldn't have had to ask you because you should have done it without me asking, it should have come naturally..."etc. etc. etc.

The wife had the original argument of "Men should always open the door for women." It ended up with "You should have opened the door for me."
That is a fallacy. It might be related in a sense but it is not directly related to the original point. That is essentially what you have done AEtheric, that is how it is a fallacy.

We conclude that the Bible is reliable and trustworthy because we've done the investigating. I can speak for myself that I didn't trust the Bible at first until I did the investigations with an open mind and had some personal experience and found it to be true.



The answer is neither of them in a nutshell, in Jesus whom we trust. As for your example, I cannot imagine two churches being right next to each other with two different denominations.
The church that best suits you is the one you go to. If you like a small church then go for it. If you like a large church then go for it.

Now that is out of the way, I cannot answer that question in that form because those two churches may have different denominations but you haven't specified what kind of denomination.
I can answer #1 based on nothing on that question and I can also answer #2 based on nothing on that question.

seems you want to know more detail, clearly a lack of trust/faith on your part

This post was edited by brmv on Apr 26 2013 05:23am

Around the corner from me there is an evangelical church neighboring (iirc) a methodist building, will take a picture if I go past it later.

be careful, 'CPK001' might get a heart attack seeing that and you will be liable

I'm holding two cans, you can only pick one can. Which can do you want and what basis of picking that particular can over the other can?

Can #1
Can #2

Stupid atheists.