I hope they let us continue in this train of thought being that I find you a worthy adversary.
Congrats - I gave you the first star I've ever given you for that. Adversarialism need not be overtly hostile - it serves a purpose, makes one
examine one's own beliefs. If that examination bolsters them or destroys them, the source is not the adversary, it is the examination itself.
A man is know by his opponents, is he not?
Their sole purpose to the individual is to keep one's self sharp, constantly striving to improve and enhance his own worldview.
The whole crux of the matter is truth. Truth is the element that brings change in a world full of lies. About standing on it's own it is in the
nature of truth that it needs no defending so that when you see people getting defensive about any tradition of men something is basically weak in
something that needs to be defended.
Truth can indeed stand on it's own - it has enough internal strength for that. The weakness is not in the position itself, it is in the individual
who holds that position. A defense of it is merely that individual trying to convince himself of his own "truth", since objective truth stands on
it's own. If the position has merit, it can be defended. It virtually defends itself.
Apparently by handing me a match you are giving me the go ahead to trash and burn all the traditions of men.
I'm giving you the go ahead to try
. Doing and trying are not the same things. If they are truly "traditions of men" only, then you will
succeed. Success remains to be seen, however.
Let us start with the beginning then. Genesis. The first book of three great faiths. Contradiction makes a statement non valid right? Adam and Eve
were the first humans. Then Cain went to a foreign land to find a bride.
No. Genesis does not name the first humans created. It simply specifies that they were created. "Adam" and "Eve" are the result of the second
account of creation of humans. Where did the first creation go? Apparently eastward to the land of Nod, for one destination. It's not specific
whether they also dispersed into other locations as well.
I can show you a whole list from beginning to end of contradictions in the bible but if there is but one then it is not the infallible word of God.
Some stupid Christians believe that the world is only six thousand years old. I have personally seen living tree that were older than that.
You know, I've been around Christians, as well as adherents of several other religions, for most of my life.It was only yesterday that I ran face to
face into the first one I've ever met who believes that the world was created 6000 years ago. Apparently she can't tell the difference between the
Bible and the pronouncements of Bishop Usher concerning
the Bible. Usher may have been a bishop, but mathematician he was not.
Nor was he the mouthpiece of God.
may be around 6,000 years old, but civilization is not the Earth. the Earth doesn't care one way or the other about civilization.
It was here long before, and will be here long after.
Usher didn't take that into account in his calculations.