- Feb 11, 2004
- 19,359
- 3,426
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
- Politics
- UK-Greens
Simply put: the texts themselves. I could go into acribic detail if you like, being employed in the field of philology, but to keep matters simple, let me tell you that a trained eye can spot different styles and layers of text the way an art historian can analyze brush strokes and textures. For example, there is no way that Genesis 1 and 2 were written by the same person: they clearly started out as two separate creation myths, and were cobbled together later on.What evidence do the liberal theologians have on their side.
Most likely not all of them. But yes, in general the ancients were pretty much ignorant with regards to most scientific findings that have supplied us with better insight into many matters during the last couple of hundred years.So you are saying viewpoints which have expounded on over the last couple of hundred years are more valid than all of those supported for some 2 thousand years (approximately).
The ancients didn't know about germs, or gravity, or heliocentrism. They thought diseases were caused by bad smells, or an imbalance of "humours". They thought of lightning and earthquakes as supernatural phenomena, not natural occurrences. They had no idea that the stars were actually remote suns. And (last but not least) they knew virtually nothing about how to analyze a text or how languages develop over time.
No, likes or dislikes have got nothing to do with it, nor is the Christian message affected by the fact that Moses didn't write the Pentateuch.Isn't it really the liberal viewpoint is easier to believe if you don't like the message Christians have been teaching for thousands of years.
Upvote
0