solja247 Wrote: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?
Wow. You're easily convinced. It seems that you're going by the old mantra 'Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.' Well, sometimes it is. If we can reasonably expect there to be some historical evidence of Moses' existence, then not finding any surely suggests that he didn't exist. It isn't strong evidence, for sure, but it's enough to make you doubt. Doubt isn't an answer; it's just a default position when all the available answers are clearly bollocks.
'We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.' H.L. Mencken
'False religion' is the ultimate tautology.
'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain
'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln
'False religion' is the ultimate tautology.
'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain
'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln
