Re: Evidence AGAINST Christianity
[ QUOTE ]
It argues agains Txaq007's stance.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is debatable because it assumes a smart person would confess he's a sinner and trust in Christ. We've had the debate on bias before. Have you ever heard two experts, like those in handwriting analysis for instance, explain how absolutely certain each one is of exactly opposite positions? And the primary reason for the difference is bias. The existence of God and the state of one's soul is not a neutral subject. There is much in the Bible on this but even without that it's logical to believe that someone would try to convince himself it isn't true if he understands the consequences if it is and totally rejects those consequences.
[ QUOTE ]
As I said, take ANY other subject with a myriad of different views where there is actually a correct answer. Would you ever bet even money, against the field. on a view held only by 20% of people and 10% of real smart people?
[/ QUOTE ]
Similar to the above, if ulterior motives are involved the handicapping becomes very difficult.
[ QUOTE ]
statements about the history of the earth (even disregarding evolution type stuff) that scientists are sure is incorrect?
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course, that's different than saying the Bible says the earth is 6000 years old. I think many scientists are sure the Bible is incorrect on some points, such as the flood, but they have not been able to demonstrate this certainty. I expect many are certain either the miralces, such as parting the sea, didn't happen or have a natural explanation. But they haven't so demonstrated.
|