(July 14, 2012 at 2:12 am)Jeffonthenet Wrote:(July 14, 2012 at 2:05 am)apophenia Wrote:
Premise: I'm out of cold beer.
Conclusion: You suck.
The form of my argument tells you little about the truth of my conclusion. Do you have any evidence that you don't suck?
"He's full of shit!"
George Carlin
Good point, just because I can't prove you don't suck doesn't mean you don't. And from your premise, your conclusion doesn't follow. Is your problem elementary logic?
(July 14, 2012 at 1:23 am)Minimalist Wrote: Misstated, Jeff.
The absence of evidence is most assuredly evidence of absence. It is not "proof" of absence.
Were I to assert the existence of invisible pink unicorns drinking maragaritas in a Tiajuana bar at Mardi Gras you should damn well doubt that assertion.
The fact that archaeology has found nothing at the site of 10th century Jerusalem to support the existence of a capital city of a great empire is indeed EVIDENCE that the stories of David and Solomon are horseshit.
The fact that 200 years of excavations in Egypt has failed to produce any evidence of a mass Hebrew enslavement casts considerable doubt on the Exodus story.
The fact that archaeology shows that there was no blitzkrieg "conquest" seriously damages the fundies who insist that "joshua" was real.
It is now up to the fundies to get out there are start digging because they are losing the battle.
There are many other ways in which the bible has been crosschecked such as the lists of names and places. (for example, the city of Ninevah and Nimrod (from all the way back in Genesis were always claimed fictional because of the absence of evidence until they were discovered which is probably all I need to carry my point about the evidence of absence) But regardless, even if those stories were filled with fictional events it wouldn't follow that God doesn't exist or that Jesus not Lord. It could follow that God is just not what Christian fundamentalists (perhaps modern day pharisees) want him to be.
Crosscheck? I didn't know we were engaged in a battle of downs and accrosses. If I were you, I wouldn't use the city/term of Nimrod as an example (nimrod, he he, ho ho, ha ha, meh).
Why exactlty was it that your all-knowing cunt couldn't locate the only man on Earth in the garden of Eden (Genesis 3:9 for your ignorant reference)?
I wait patiently for your excuse. Why your at it; why do you have to give an excuse for a fucking god?
