1.6% of the North American population says that the Bible can’t be trusted in what it says.
Example: Sceptical (read atheist) archeologist Kathleen Kenyon said that the fall of Jericho did not happen in the time period stated by the Bible.
Why would she say that? Well, according to atheists, if any historical document has been included into the Bible it should automatically be considered a lie or legend or myth. Typical of atheists, Kenyon’s atheist bias was so strong that it led her to override her professional training and instead draw the wrong conclusion from the available evidence.
As Time magazine later announced, “When the evidence is critically examined there is no basis for her contention that City IV [the level of the city that corresponded to Joshua's time] was destroyed . . . in the mid-16th century B.C.E. [before the Christian era]" (ibid., p. 57).”
In fact, only an atheist bias caused her to MANIPULATE the evidence to suit the conclusion that she wanted to find. The Biblical account was confirmed by archeology.
Sadly, this 1.6% of the population still maintains their position that what the Bible says cannot be trusted. In fact more atheists - not fewer but MORE atheists - are saying that the New Testament is pure fiction. They say that the stated authors were not the real authors. The events described were not real events. Yes the Christian Church exists today but not because of any of the events described in the New Testament.
"jesus never existed and the bible is mythology" - ‘the 40-year-old atheist’ 6/22/10
Atheists must say this or their world-view will collapse.
Will similar examples to the one displayed for us by atheist Kathleen Kenyon put an end to these people’s claim that the Bible can’t be trusted? Of course not. Just like those who deny the Holocaust, no amount of evidence will be enough to change their minds.
Kenyon of course is far from the exception. In fact, she represents the norm.
This is what these people are like. It’s how they think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Why don't you consider lying to be a sin, Rod?
ReplyDelete". Just like those who deny the Holocaust, no amount of evidence will be enough to change their minds."
ReplyDeleteyou evil little man.
As a Christian I know you do not worship the same God I do.
Consider this a rubuke.
Thesauros never tries to deny that he's lying.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand, this might be an example of him being honest with himself: he knows he lies to other people, yet he doesn't care. On the other hand, gentle readers of this blog know that he claims to be a Christian while pointing to a code of morality which clearly says lying is wrong; and this behavior seems indicative of self-deception.
Oh Rod, you're a study in contradiction...
SUMMARY OF THIS BLOG, VERSION 4 (?)
ReplyDeleteThesauros: Atheists say 'that the Bible can’t be trusted in what it says'
Non-Christians: No Rod, you are wrong, non-believers reject the supernatural claims.
Thesauros: In fact more atheists - not fewer but MORE atheists - are saying that the New Testament is pure fiction.
Non-Christians: No Rod, you are wrong, non-believers reject ONLY the supernatural claims, and anything else which is purely symbolic. You do the same by admiting that parts of the Bible is metaphorical...
Thesauros: jesus never existed and the bible is mythology" - ‘the 40-year-old atheist’ 6/22/10
Atheists must say this or their world-view will collapse.
Non-Christians: Whether Jesus existed or not as a real figure is irrelevant, a virgin birth and a resurection are fiction, by default, until proven otherwise. Can you prove it?
Plus, if some random atheists say that the Bible is pure fiction, non-historical at all, it's their problem, they are simply wrong.
Thesauros: Just like those who deny the Holocaust, no amount of evidence will be enough to change their minds.
These people are all the same to me anyway.
This is what these people are like. It’s how they think.
Non-believers:
You are a liar, and you know it.
OR
You don't know it, and you are suffering from some mental problems that prevent you from understanding ideas exposed by other people.
One day we might find out exactly what's going on in your head...
I'm not so sure that's a place I want to be exposed to, Hugo :)
ReplyDeleteI actually don't think he's a liar, except perhaps for some unconcious self deception. When I was a small child I believed in god, and I remember a powerful mechanism of ignorance and filtration at work. It's too subtle to call a means for lying, but rather a device operating
ReplyDeleteon denial and the contortion of ideas incompatible with theology. I hate to bring up Richard Dawkins simply because theists tend to think he's the "high priest" of atheism and don't want to add to their impression that we hang on his every word, but Dawkins was incredibly accurate to call religion a delusion.
With rod I can't help but get the impression that he feels guilty for something, when I read his text. Though I can't imagine why. Most religious individuals I've met rejoice in "gods beautiful design." but not mak. No, mak is more like "god created shit, and here we are." or "god said, let their be intelligent conductors of evil, and humans were born."
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure that's a place I want to be exposed to, Hugo :)
ReplyDeletelol!