the point is you aren't being objective when you use a religious text or what someone else says as grounds for your argument. you can cite it as support for your argument, but since no one religious text is agreed upon worldwide as truth, we need to go to plan B. the problem is that you run into an intellectual wall when you use points like "Well Jesus says..." or "Buddha says"...

yes its your belief that what that text says is true, but you aren't really citing an a priori reason for it, you're just using someone else's logic and aren't going past it to figure out why that text says what it says or why that religious figure said what they said. and if you can't go past it then there's really no point to get into the argument because you aren't saying anything new that takes the argument in a new direction.

(i'm not directing this at you ketsueki15, just in general, sorry for the obscene use of pronouns)

also, i wish i had a magic talking donkey. that's all.