(August 29, 2017 at 10:19 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(August 29, 2017 at 9:59 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: No, it isn't. What they've seen is the event itself. Evidence is that information which would bring a third person to a conclusion about what had happened in the event, even though the third person wasn't there.
What they seen of the event, is not information in which to base a conclusion? Does a person need to see the evidence for themselves, in order for it to be evidence?
How do you manage to ignore every relevant point? How? HOW?!!!!!!!
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
