| padib said: I know, that's why I gave a full picture in my original post. I mentioned, to recap: 1. The authenticity of the manuscripts. 2. The historicity of the places and events. 3. The cohesion of the texts. 4. The fulfillment of the prophecies by said figure (Christ in this case). 5. My personal conviction given reason and emotion. I understand this one is subjective, but it fits perfectly in the OT's rules. Proof is subjective, in that the person who accepts a claim as proof needs to have it proven subjectively to them, given their understanding of the world around them. Anyway I won't go too deep into this last point because we'll never end. But point 5 is there. I gave the many together and the pieces fall into place for me, that makes it what I believe. You don't think that's fair game, I had the exact same thing said to me about ToE. Everything falls into place so its proven. Well I'm just playing by the same rules for equal debate. |
Points 2-5 kinda fail the test, you know. And proof really is not subjective. How can you say something like this? It kinda kills any chance of being taken seriously.
"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"
"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."
(The Voice of a Generation and Seece)
"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"
(pizzahut451)
