Bong Lover said:
I hope the OP reads this post and understands what it means. Trying to apply the scientific method to matters of faith is folly. It's like trying to solve a math problem with a fish. |
Sounds like some people just don't want to acknowledge the Law of Parsimony or Occam's Razor ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor ) which posits that if you have simple, rational explanations for things, then there's no need to attach a faith-based / supernatural explanation to them.
In effect since every claim that has ever been put forth as correct by Fundamentalist Bible believers has been found to be in error since Gallileo demonstrated that the earth isn't the center of the universe, Darwin and his successors demonstrated that all the animals didn't pop up fully formed in seven days but only reached their present state after millions of years of evolution, and geologists and astronomers demonstrated that the earth is far older than 6,000 years of age;
Or were found to have never happened eg. no archaeological evidence for Hebrew slaves in Egypt, no real mention in the earliest written Christian accounts that Jesus ever resurrected and its being demonstrated since the time of Julius Welhausen ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis) that The Bible was not literally handed down from God to Moses as believers long believed but "The Bible"took over 1,000 years to write with much scribal editing being put into the mix to remove or insert whatever parts various groups of priests wanted stressed over the 1,000 year time period;
And all of the miracles of the book like those in Egypt being found to have perfectly rational scientific explanations or can be explained by inferring that various prophets were on drugs or never even existed or were greatly expanded upon by different authors eg. "Isisah" actually having been written by 3 or more authors over a lengthy time period;
Then if Occam's Razor holds true as it is generally accepted that it should, it's illogical for anyone to have faith.
