Three Unanswerable Questions
"They cannot be answered by any skeptics, agnostics, atheists, mystics, and infidels no matter how cute and smart
Now I'm blushing.
"They can only answer the [questions] if and only if they will first assume the truth of God who revealed the Bible."
You do understand, of course, that assuming the answers to questions is a technique that anyone can use. A Hindu
has assumed different answers to the above than you have; how is one to decide whose assumptions are correct?
But please show us how your answers are better than mine.
"I challenge anyone who claims to be in his or her sane mind even though they do not believe the truth of Christianity
to answer the three questions. I will publish his or her answers with my refutations..."
I do claim to be sane. Feel free to publish my answers with whatever refutations you see fit.
Because it has been published in a renowned forum, this author decided to
refute it not only for the benefit of this infidel but also of many infidels like him who
joined the forum. The refutation received no formal reply from infidels which proved that
the 3Q Challenge is really unanswerable. It has only been ridiculed as nothing but an
expression of Biblicist, Fundamentalist, or Judeo-Christian thinking. Thus, the 3Q
Challenge remained unanswerable until this day. This refutation must be read in
its entirety to understand the undeniable force of the biblical argument:
You did not offer any true answer to my 3Q Challenge that’s why I ignore it. You are
unaware that you merely deepened and reproduced your problems. You merely raised
further questions by your “answer” to the three unanswerable basic questions for
infidels, skeptics and critics. You did not think enough to understand the 3Q Challenge,
let alone to answer them. Below are your so-called answers which can be found inside
the brackets without omission or addition. My demonstration that they are not answer at
all follows which begins with P.E. and ends with *****.
[Periander, I notice that you still claim on your website that no one has tried to answer your "three unanswerable questions". I'm
sure that a good Christian like yourself wouldn't lie, so I must conclude that you haven't seen my response here. To save you the
trouble of looking for it, I repeat it here:
Periander, I came across this challenge on your website. These are good and fair questions, and I gave them a shot. I expect that
we will get deeper into them if you care to respond.
"1. How do you know that you really know what you pretend to know?"
I use two criteria: self-consistency, and consistency with sense-data. That is, those things that fit with the other things that I "know" I
consider more probable than those things that do not fit; and those things that accord with what I experience I consider more
probable than those things that do not accord with my experience. In accordance with the scientific method, all knowledge is
provisional. I place very high confidence in some propositions, and lesser amounts in others; and there are some statements that I
do not pretend to be able to evaluate the truth value of.
There are fundamental questions about the reliability of sense data and the nature of logic which I will go into if need be, but keep in
mind that a believer's knowledge of the Bible is through the senses and his understanding is mediated by logic, so if they are
unreliable for me they are unreliable for you too.]
P.E. – Basically, your criteria of knowledge are logic and sense-experience. These
represent, if you know, two epistemological theories respectively: coherence theory of
the rationalists and correspondence theory of the empiricists which are contradicting