Go to your posting history and see for yourself. :lol:ShadowsDemon

Give one example. I don't have time to go through 2000 odd posts, but since your so adament I did it, you must have witnessed it. Please show where I categorically denied the science and the theory? That I tried to show it cannot be trusted? Or are you simply making things up?

wis3boi

You consider the historicity of Jesus, something which is well established in historical communities and that only the fringe, non educated virtually uphold as being **** In that case your no better than a southern fundamentalist on evolution.

I know why I'm against it, that is on the basis of divine morality, although how the naturalist could justify being against it (which they often are) beats me.

:lol: Which is exactly what you do.ShadowsDemon

Name one time I did it. Go on.

........So, you're unreasonable as well. l4dak47

I'm not the one denying well established truths.

Yes there is.Nuck81

Nuck do you consider a just recently found document from the fourth century, of which its authenticity and meaning is still being debated evidence? Or at least evidence that can back up a point.

Well as an orthodox thats the book we kind of put aside. But in all seriousness I have no idea who the beasts are, the book of revelation is probably one of hte most heavily Old testament reminescent books in terms of apocalyptic language and usage one would have to read and understand Daniel, jeremiah and the like before even attempting to understand this book. Then of course one has to understand the first century power structure and events that happened. It is a very hard book to interpret, nigh impossible for most I would suggest.

How exactly is that unreasonable?

worlock77

When one denies all evidence which suggests a fact that the educated community in which virtually every single case and study and serious consideration on this topic has been exhausted and dealt with, I call it unreasonable. Like a creationist arguing against Biological evolution.

this is why I take the position of "There's little to no evidence of his existence, so until there is, I assume he wasn't real."

wis3boi

So basically you are unreasonable?

Not any more.