Religion
In reply to the discussion: Fill in the blank [View all]rug
(82,333 posts)In determining whether to accept an unprovable claim, it must first be determined whether or not the particular claim is essential or not.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-metaphysics/#SubEss
If it is not essential, whether it is literal truth is mildly interesting but unnecessary.
The second test is whether the particular claim is consistent with other essential claims.
http://logic.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/tutorial1/tut1-01.htm
So, pointing fingers at talking snakes really does not to debunk whether there are such things as good or evil, knowledge or ignorance.
As to what other religions claim, the same intellectual tests should apply, even if they have starkly different beliefs. This is all abot the reasonableness of faith(s), not about the proof of faith(s).