Biblical Christianity 101, a study of the book of Romans

[RoadRunner79]

---

Can you please provide some of this heaps of evidence.... most of what I have seen, is just making up a different story and denying the actual historical evidence, because of a priori bias against any type of miracle.  It's not considered good historical scholarship at all.

If I wished to deny evolution, can I just deny the evidence, and say that it is more likely that they are mistaken or made things up, simply because of a priori bias?

---

There is no historical or scientific evidence to support any miraculous claims, so there is no reason to believe that miracles happen. Evolution, on the other hand, is backed by evidence from biology, geology, and various other modes of science. One might deny that evidence, but for miracles there is no evidence to deny.

Do you mean the evidence that scientist observe and tell me about?   If you discount observation and testimony as evidence, then I don't believe that science has any evidence either.  There are a great number of things in science, that I have to rely on the observation and accounting of others as evidence.  And while a subjective judgment some of them may be found difficult to believe.  

So I would feel equally justified in saying that there is no evidence for evolution if you are able to use this method to say the same of Christianity.  I don't believe this is correct.  Now if you have actual evidence against or reasons to believe it is untrue, we can discuss it. Even bad evidence is still evidence. And if you are going to make a claim, then the burden of proof is on you to support it.