Taoism is the One True Religon

1. Burden of ProofIf my opponent is not willing or able to fulfill the burden of proof, it seems to me that he should have made a much more modest claim. The assertion that "Taoism is the One True Religion" is one without any warrant and so it requires my opponent to carry the burden of proof.2. RebuttalIn my opening argument, I refuted each of my opponents arguments (listed in numerical order below) in favor of his claim that "Taoism is the One True Religion". Let's take a look at what my opponent has to say about each refutation:1. These books are infallibly correct.In my refutation of this argument, I explained to my opponent that he cannot merely assert this without any justification and expect anyone to take it to be true. Here is my opponent's response:"The three books mentioned are infallibly correct because they are without moral or logical error"I will neither agree nor disagree with my opponent's assertion that the books of Taoism are without moral or logical error, because that is not relevant to this argument. Even if I were to grant that each of these books were without moral or logical error, this would do nothing to show that they are true. My opponent still has all of his work ahead of him in showing that the books are infallibly correct. For example, consider this statement:"Last week I donated $50 to a charity organization."This statement is without moral or logical error. However, it is false. Last week, I did not donate $50 to a charity organization. In the very same way, even if my opponent's claim that the books of Taoism are without moral and logical error (which I don't for a moment concede they are) this does nothing to show that the books themselves are infallibly correct. This argument remains refuted.2. These books possess all that is good in other religions, and none of what is bad (like offensive violence, char-broiling in hell, etc.)In my refutation of this argument, I pointed out that this again is an unwarranted assertion made by my opponent. Furthermore, I asked my opponent to show what "good" and "bad" are, as these terms are certainly not universally agreed upon. Finally, I presented my opponent with a dilemma: If they are inherently good, I would ask my opponent to elaborate on just how he came to know exactly what is "good" and what is "bad". If they are good only because they are found in the books of Taoism, then we have been presented with circular reasoning. In my opponent's response, he provided no justification for his claim and he failed to give an answer to the dilemma I posed. This argument remains refuted.3. If Taoism is not true, in fact, then there is no possibility for using logic and reason, for logic and reason already assume theexistence of the Great and Mysterious Tao. Even those unacquainted with the Three Holy Scriptures of Taoism use the Tao without being aware of it. Therefore, Taoism is the Mother Truth of all human thought.In my refutation of this argument, I noted that logic and reason are independent of Taoism. Furthermore, I pointed out that Taoism only originated within the last 3,000 years, meaning that if my opponent's argument is correct then humanity has gone 197,000 years without the ability to even think. In my opponent's response, he gave no reason to think that "If Taoism is not true, in fact, then there is no possibility for using logic and reason, for logic and reason already assume the existence of the Great and Mysterious Tao." My opponent then goes on to argue that Taoism was not formed in 550 B.C. When I say that Taoism was formed in 550 B.C., I do not mean to say that "Tao" originated in 550 B.C. as my opponent seems to misunderstand. Rather, I mean to say that the religion itself was established in that time period. Here are three independent sources that show Taoism originated in 550 B.C. or sooner:http://www.patheos.com...http://www.bbc.co.uk...http://www.taoism.net...This argument remains refuted.4. Nicholas Cage is a Taoist.In my refutation of this argument, I pointed out that Nicholas Cage does not prove Taoism true any more than Tom Cruise proves scientology true. My opponent concedes this argument in his response:"It is true that Nicholas Cage being a Taoist is not "real evidence", and, to be fair, I am not aware that Nicholas Cage self-identifies as a Taoist... I am willing to throw out this argument, however. In fact, I just wanted to give a shout-out to Nicholas Cage in case he is reading this, because I like him"This argument remains refuted.5. Haikus are neat.In my refutation of this argument, I merely said that though I agree Haikus are neat, this does not serve as any sort of evidence in favor of Taoism being "the one true religion". My opponent seems to concede this argument as well.This argument remains refuted. 3. SummaryI have refuted each of my opponent's five points which attempted to prove Taoism to be the "One True Religion". As there stands not a single reason to think Taoism is true, my opponent has all of his work ahead of him in order to shoulder the burden of proof in showing that "Taoism is the One True Religion".4. Sourceshttp://www.patheos.com...http://www.bbc.co.uk...http://www.taoism.net...