IF DOGMA INFALLIBLE THEN IT'S JUSTIFICATIONS ARE INFALLIBLE TOO!!!

 
A teaching you are not allowed to wilfully doubt or deny is called a dogma. Humanism does not have any dogmas for it does not tell anybody what to believe but just asks people to think for themselves and gives them the chance to receive the truth. People must see the truth on their own and giving orders does not help a person to believe. Banning people from doubting or denying a doctrine merely makes them feel you are trying to hide something and you don't want them to think it out or they will see they are being had by you.
 
When religion and the Bible make dogmas out of many different ideas but do not make dogmas out of the evidence for these dogmas it shows they are practicing blind faith. They are saying the evidence can be wrong and is only a fluid changeable source. They are saying we can scrap the evidences and look for new ones if we can find them and that anything will do as evidence for faith. This really means that faith matters and evidence doesn’t which is a nonsensical and dangerous attitude. It is really bending the facts to fit the theories and is wildly dishonest. Evidence is supposed to make dogmas not dogmas evidence. Both the Catholic Church and the Bible say we can rationally show that God exists but they are not dogmatic regarding any of the proofs for God and everybody disagrees with everybody else on the evidence but not the dogma. Does this not show that their faith is caused by emotional need and not evidence or love of truth?
 
Faith that pretends to be intelligent and evidence based but which isn't is a timebomb. The believers can end up ready to tear apart anybody who exposes their "faith" for they are led to act like they are addicted to it. If religion is in conflict with the evidence and in conflict with truth and when one teaching contradicts another or is too complex to understand then what? The good done by such religion will be short-term. The religion will disintegrate into factions and sects. There will be theological war. Bloodletting and hate will follow.
 
 
BOOKS CONSULTED
A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1985
A Common Faith, John Dewey, Yale University Press, Connecticut, 1968
A Primer of Necessary Belief, Dawson Jackson ,Victor Gollancz Ltd, London, 1957
Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, M H Gill and Son Ltd, Dublin, 1954
Faith and Ambiguity, Stewart R Sutherland, SCM Press, London, 1984
God and Philosophy, Antony Flew, Hutchinson, London, 1966
In Defence of the Faith, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene Oregon, 1996
On Being a Christian, Hans Kung, Collins/Fount Paperbacks, Glasgow, 1978
Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, 1996
Reason and Belief, Bland Blanschard, London, George Allen and Unwin Ltd, 1974
Reason and Religion, Anthony Kenny, Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford, 1987
The Balance of Truth, EI Watkin, Hollis & Carter, London, 1943
The Case Against Christ, John Young, Falcon Books, London, 1971
The End of Faith, Religion, Terror And The Future Of Reason, Sam Harris, Free Press, London, 2005
The Faith of a Subaltern, Alec de Candole, Cambridge University Press, 1919
The Fundamental Questions of Philosophy, A.C. Ewing, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1985
The Future of Belief Debate, Ed Gregory Baum, Herder and Herder, New York, 1967
The Student’s Catholic Doctrine, Rev Charles Hart BA, Burns & Oates, London, 1961
Unblind Faith, Michael J Langford, SCM, London, 1982
What is Christianity? Very Rev W Moran DD, Catholic Truth Society of Ireland, Dublin, 1940
What is Faith? Anthony Kenny, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992