Posted by: dagny ( )
Date: January 01, 2011 09:10PMDidn't Haught get the memo?

All those people actually thought it was just myth and didn't actually kill thinking it was god's directive. (Just ask real historians and not atheist ones.)

I have Haught's "2000 Years of Disbelief." It is the only book by him I have read so far.

Darn- you are making me need to buy more of his stuff.

My point was that none of the big 4 atheists are historians and yet many people here, including yourself as far as I can tell, accept their version of history over the views of actual historians. That was the point. I don't care if someone is an atheist or not so long as he is fair and writing about a subject he knows. Why would people accept the word of a scientist, a journalist and philosopher/jack of all trades on an unrelated field especially when real historians have said that the issue is much more complicated than they imply?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2011 11:03PM by bona dea.

And why do we have to believe only THEISTS or Agnostics? On what provable grounds can you dismiss Atheists?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2011 10:49PM by MJ.

OMG, that is not what I said. Atheism isn't the issue. QUALIFICATION IS THE ISSUE. Got it? You'd look a lot smarter if you read the post before spouting off about something I didn't say, but then you have quite the habit of that, don't you? Good night

Can't you even remember what you say from post to post? You said and I QUOTE

"Just ask real historians and not atheist ones." You are CLEARLY excluding ATHEISTS as people to ask. Even YOU should be able to see that.

So my question STILL STANDS, why LEGITIMATE PROVABLE REASON do you have for excluding atheists as people we should ask?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2011 11:08PM by MJ.

According to bona dea, such focused study qualifies one to be everything from a history expert to a film critic.

Amazing!

Timothy

qualified historians.

;-P