(June 2, 2015 at 9:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: ...
(June 2, 2015 at 8:26 am)Pyrrho Wrote: It is hard to know what, exactly, the intentions are of writers, particularly ancient ones whose view of the world was radically different from ours. Early writers seem to have a very loose grasp on the concept of history, and have a hard time sticking to facts.
Are we could simply read what they said such as:
Luke 1:3-4
it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theoph′ilus,[b] 4 that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.
...
When trying to evaluate a book, trusting the truth of what is in it is just plain stupid. It is getting the cart before the horse (if you will pardon the homely expression). If you read a book, in which the author claims that it is all pure truth, that is absolutely no reason to believe it is true at all.
What you are doing is essentially begging the question. You are ASSUMING that the book is true, and so when it says that it is for a particular purpose, you accept it as fact. But if the book is not true, then trusting what it says it is, is giving you false ideas.
The trouble with this entire thread is, you are not going into the matter with an open mind, unbiassed, but have already decided that it is true, and so your starting point has already assumed the conclusion that you are trying to prove.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
