1.6% of the North American population says that the Bible can’t be trusted in what it says.
Example: Sceptics (read atheists) used to say that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and perhaps even Moses were simply imaginary creations.
Since then archeology has confirmed the place of these individuals in history. Does this matter to this portion of the population? Not a chance.
This 1.6% of the population still maintains their implausible position, not because of the evidence but in spite of the evidence. They must do this or their world-view will collapse.
This is what these people are like. It’s how they think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1.6% of the North American population says that the Bible can’t be trusted in what it says.
ReplyDeleteWrong, Christians claim that it's a special book; everybody else simply sees it for what it is, a collection of ancient books, no more or less trustable than other books.
Example: Sceptics (read atheists) used to say that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and perhaps even Moses were simply imaginary creations.
Since then archeology has confirmed the place of these individuals in history. Does this matter to this portion of the population? Not a chance.
Correct, who cares?
Not that I don't care about archeology, quite the contrary, it is always interesting to learn about history, but your next sentence is...
This 1.6% of the population still maintains their implausible position, not because of the evidence but in spite of the evidence.
...so it's not only about history; you consider that archeology should convince atheists that their position (non-belief in God) is implausible/wrong.
Explain that one to my slow mind.
Archeology has done nothing of the sort, mak. Archeology has confirmed that the biblical myth existed long ago, not that a sea was actually parted. Despite this, you will still Maintain your implausible position, not because of the evidence but in spite of the evidence. You must do this or your worldview will collapse. It's how you are, it's how you think.
ReplyDeleteHow about archeological "evidence" in favor of buddism?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1141400/posts
How about Islam?
http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/02-03_Islamic_Arch.pdf
Aliens?
http://www.aliens-everything-you-want-to-know.com/AliensinArchaeology.html
Shall I post archeological evidence for big foot?
Again, your "Evidence" doesn't satisfy a standard required for any other scientific claim that may enter the lab.
Where does this "it's how they think" shtick come from?
ReplyDeleteIn the short time I've spent reading and commenting here, I've come to feel that Mak is pathologically incapable of understanding how other people think...
Where does this "it's how they think" shtick come from?
ReplyDeleteFrom his ass?
In the short time I've spent reading and commenting here, I've come to feel that Mak is pathologically incapable of understanding how other people think...
You are absolutely correct, it's just a more polite way to say what I just said ;)
However, I still think that it's interesting to discuss with Rod, or Mak, or Thesauros, because he is obviously a good person. He just has some hatred for atheists and I do not fully understand why yet.
Why do you hate atheists Rod? or actually, why do you think they are slow of mind and dull of thought? Why such broad statement? i would never, ever, say that about Christians you know... actually, no, I don't think you know that...