Atheism, the short lived idea?

[thesummerqueen]

Its over-skepticism. I had done a couple of days research into the historicity of Moses, Joseph and David and I was going to throw it all in. I am at a Chrstian University (Not one of those crazy ones) and I asked the OT scholar there some hard questions. I said, 'You do realise there is zero evidence for a historical Moses, Abraham and Joseph.' He said, 'I know, does that mean they didnt exist?' My skepticism collapsed, I had no reason to be overy-skeptic or doubt the existence of Abraham, Joseph and Moses...From then on it was nearly a straight path back to theism.

Why sould the doubt become the answers?

You do realize there's zero evidence for unicorns, bigfoot, dragons, and leprechauns, right? Am I still supposed to just shrug and say "that doesn't mean they don't exist..."

No offense, but that is the most bullshit reason to not be skeptical. Every true skeptic I know is quite willing to change their mind in the face of hard evidence. The reason they don't say "eh...there's no evidence, but it doesn't hurt to believe it anyway" is because in some cases it CAN hurt. There's no evidence that vaccines cause autism, yet people are believing it anyway and now choosing to let their children risk horrible diseases we worked hard to cure.

There IS a reason to be overly-skeptical - especially of biblical figures. The second you put a person in a leadership role, you give them power over you. Jews, Christians, and Muslims listen to the teachings of these people as prophets - you better damn well ask for evidence of their existence and how they got their information. Why is this person telling me I have to eat food prepared a certain way, or wear only a certain type of clothing? Then I get to decide if it's best for me. Obama could march his way into my office right now and tell me that I should be doing A, B, and C and I'd still look him straight in the face and say "Really? Why?" and I suspect the rest of you would too. I think this is probably because he's still alive, not long dead like Abraham. But you know Obama exists, so why don't you trust his judgments? (Rhetorical question, I don't know your political affiliation. I guess a better metaphor might be Pat Robertson. Who trusts that guy? He quotes a lot of things from the same book you use, but he's alive and obviously exists...guess we're allowed to mistrust him for the thieving bastard he is.) Anyway, I digress.

You were arguing based on something science needs (evidence) and your scholar was arguing based on faith. They're two different things.

I don't understand this concept of "overly skeptical". The nearest I can equate it with is people who are actually conspiracy theorists, and they're not overly skeptical at all, except of the truth. They're quite unskeptical of their own views.