RE: Why the "There are so many interpretations of the Bible" claim is confused
November 1, 2015 at 1:48 am
(November 1, 2015 at 1:38 am)robvalue Wrote: Logical arguments are not evidence. They are only as true as their initial assumptions.
Textual accounts are evidence, just woefully insufficient evidence for a sceptic regarding the claims that are normally made.
Anecdotal accounts are also evidence, but again insufficient to a sceptic.
Unexplained phenomena are not evidence. They are simply unexplained.
Well, this is bullshit.
So-called "sceptics" are plenty happy to accept textual accounts in other cases.
It's only skepticism because they have a problem with theism. At least have the integrity to admit that much.