Overwhelming evidence?!

     The blogger at Debunking Atheists recently did a post entitled "Overwhelming Evidence!" attempting to say the bible must be accurate because it has not been tampered with in a few thousand years. In this effort, he only manages to convince those who already believe the bible to be accurate. The fact is that that standard is worthless.
     Let's leave aside, for the time being, the fact that some passages (like the "let he who is without sin" line) appear to be additions after the fact. Some passages are conpicuously absent from the earliest versions available. What is important to my position is that the bible was not written by historians. It was written by people (anonymous people) who had an interest in spreading their, uh, religion. It bears no credibility. The legends of the Greek and Roman gods have been likewise preserved. They are of no value as historical records. (They have value as historical artifacts. They help us understand earlier cultures.) Would we expect, three thousand years hence, the writings of Joseph Smith to be taken as "the word of god." He certainly claimed that they were.
     Ultimately, I recognize that the bible is an ancient book. It is an ancient book of legends. And I give it the same regard as any other ancient book of legends. The burden is still on the believer of those legends to demonstrate that it contains history rather than legends.

Wow! I thought someone would contradict me on my last post.

     So, complete agreement. I must have hit the nail on the head. I really expected that one of the christian readers would say they thought claims of persecution were different from my perception.

Okay, so I can't draw.

     This is my opinion of most christian claims of persecution. Any comments?

Something to consider

     This world could be a test to see who has the courage to stand up to an evil fiend even if the fiend is believed to be unbeatable. The actions attributed to the biblical god are rather plainly evil. A lot of people make excuses for him simply because of an ability to throw his weight around. Suppose this world is such a test. Who has the courage to stand on principle? And who cops out with claims like "there must be a good reason if he does it"?

One person said he thought that christians attempt to use reasoning to convince themselves of their faith.

     I disagree. I think that they are simply trying to procure more victims... er... followers of the faith. A pretense of logic and reasoning seems to be the only tool at their disposal at the moment. I have little doubt that many of them would prefer swordpoint conversions. They will deny this; and may even be convinced of their denial. But the history is rather plain. Whenever christianity had the power to coerce people into the fold, that is what it did. Even now, we see fearmongering in telling people they will burn forever if they don't join up.
     I consider it quite possible that such christians really are possessed by evil spirits. It seems to fit. (No, I don't consider that a scientific assessment in any way shape or form.) There could be a world beyond what we see that is different from what christianity claims.

Ray deleted another one of my comments.

     I'm not really surprised, even though it didn't violate any of his stated rules. The comment exposed an inconvenient truth that might detract from his income.
     My comment was in response to Ray asking German Mike what would happen if "god" took him up on his request to have Ray show up at his door. Ray said he had important things to do. I pointed out that he is just not that important. And the only people who would seriously pray for Ray to show up are the ones that WORSHIP RAY.

     After I called Ray on it, the comment mysteriously appeared between other comments where it had not been before. I still think he is dishonest.

Worldviews can be interesting.

     One person seems to be claiming to have concluded that the bible is "the word of god." But he rejects the plain meaning of passages and goes with what "bible scholars" say they "really mean." He can't be trusting the bible if he can't decide for himself what it means. Historically, "bible scholars" have adjusted these meanings always avoiding having to admit that the bible contains errors. I find them completely untrustworthy. But there is also an obvious tear in the belief system. The belief that the bible is "the word of god" had to have been a premise. Seeking out scholars to smooth over passages only makes sense if one is trying to protect a belief.
     Another person claims that "everyone knows that god is real." First off, I think the biblical god is fake. More importantly, such beliefs are learned. And these beliefs are taugh by fiat. There has, to date, been no independently verified evidence in favor of the biblical god. But he is probably sincere in his belief that people have such ingrained "knowledge."