Documented accounts
need to be judged for reliability, not all evidence is equally valuable.
How reliable is a 2,000 year old document that has been translated, edited, redacted etc?
I'm going to go with "not very". Even if it was hot off the fucking press though, I'd still probably want more than a boring collection of anecdotes to convince me of the one true story of creation. I'm terribly cynical like that.
(
chart cat has an itch, Sun 28 Nov 2010, 15:43,
Share,
Reply)