1.6% of the North American population says that the Bible can’t be trusted in what it says.
Example: The ancient city of Petra was virtually unknown to archaeologists, with only the Bible to give account of its existence. As is common, atheists called Biblical accounts of the stronghold mythological. All the references in Scripture were considered to be figments of the imagination. Atheists claimed the non-existence of Petra as proof for the unreliability of Scripture.
But 200 years ago all of that changed when one man made a legendary discovery. Only 161 kilometres from Jerusalem. Today the site of ancient Petra is a popular tourist destination.
Even though these people say that without observation and verification nothing can be believed this 1.6% of the population still maintains their implausible position that the Bible is unreliable, not because of the evidence but in spite of the evidence. They must do this or their world-view will collapse.
Will this and similar examples put an end to these people’s claim that the Bible can’t be trusted? Of course not.
This is what these people are like. It’s how they think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Each post in the 'The 1.6% Solution' series is evidence that Thesauros is a LIAR.
ReplyDeleteHe knows that Atheists (which means any non-Christian for him) do not reject the historicity of the Bible; yet he claims that they do.
At the same time, his religious delusion is so strong that he is not able to process the point that non-believer make about the Bible, or any other so-called divine books: they are not sufficient proof for believing in supernatural claims. Nothing to do with history.
Will this and similar examples put an end to Thesauros' misrepresentation of Atheists? Of course not.
This is what this person is like. It’s how he thinks.
Why do you lie about people, Thesauros? Doesn't your Book tell you that lying is bad?
ReplyDeleteYou *do* believe in your Book, don't you?
The term "non historic kings." Where do you think that came from?
ReplyDeleteAtheists and only atheists that's who.
The only parts that atheists agree to, re: historical accuracy are those parts that have been proven beyond doubt by extra Biblical sources. Despite the enormous amount of evidence, rather than becoming fewer in number, a GROWING number of atheists are saying that the New Testament is non historic in nature.
Dull of mind. Slow of thought. To a person.
Dull of mind. Slow of thought. To a person.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you lie about people, Thesauros?
Are you one of those Christians who claims to believe in the Bible, yet refuses to live by the morality it prescribes?
If you really did have morality and righteousness on your side, you wouldn't need to lie about the people you disagree with...
ReplyDeleteThe term "non historic kings." Where do you think that came from?
ReplyDeleteAtheists and only atheists that's who.
The only parts that atheists agree to, re: historical accuracy are those parts that have been proven beyond doubt by extra Biblical sources.
Despite the enormous amount of evidence, rather than becoming fewer in number, a GROWING number of atheists are saying that the New Testament is non historic in nature.
Each post in the 'The 1.6% Solution' series is evidence that Thesauros is a LIAR.
ReplyDeleteHe knows that Atheists (which means any non-Christian for him) do not reject the historicity of the Bible; yet he claims that they do.
Rod. Is. A. LIAR. Period.