Monday, January 20, 2014

An argument for the authenticity of the Bible

Fiction is always consistent in and of itself. The real world, by comparison, is a very chaotic place. This means that eyewitnesses from different perspectives, will see different things, will even see the same event differently.

Consistent evidence, in comparison, is a sign of fiction- if there is no data that does not fit the theory, chances are very good that the data was very carefully chosen to support the theory.

9 comments:

Theodore Seeber said...

Inconsistencies indicate that someone is not telling the truth. Maybe no one is telling the truth.

Theodore Seeber said...

Secularism is not in itself a dictatorship. Catholicism is a dictatorship since the popes appoint the cardinals who in turn elect the popes who then wield unrestricted authority over all of Catholicism.

Theodore Seeber said...

If you take that opinion, then human beings are utterly incapable of telling the truth. Or it may be that the truth is just a bit more complex than we are willing to admit. Two blind men describing an elephant as a hose and a rope are not lying, they're at opposite ends of the same animal.

Theodore Seeber said...

no, it's about poor people getting pregnant in high school and remaining poor for the rest of their lives because they can't afford a kid at 14. you suck at life.

Theodore Seeber said...

everyone in sweden is free to leave at any time.

Theodore Seeber said...

If Secularism is not a dictatorship, then why does it dictate how everybody can act?

Theodore Seeber said...

Secularism rejects the idea that any one religion can dictate how everyone should act. It is the opposite of what you think it is.

Theodore Seeber said...

And in so doing, creates a new religion that believes that religion should not be involved in morality- and is quite firm about that belief. Just let a religious person speak up, and the secularists will be calling for fines, jail, and eventually, the death penalty.

Theodore Seeber said...

It's obvious that religion should not be involved in defining public morality. Why should gays be told that they are immoral just because the Catholic Church says that they are if they act on their natural inclinations? This is the same institution that is paying billions of dollars in settlements to victims of clerical abuse that was allowed and covered up by, among others, Cardinal Ratzinger, who insisted that he receive a report on every pedophile priest and then did absolutely nothing even when he became Pope Benedict XVI. Why should he or his successors be able to set moral guidelines for gays who want to marry or anyone else?

Creative Commons License
Oustside The Asylum by Ted Seeber is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
Based on a work at http://outsidetheaustisticasylum.blogspot.com.