while almost totally agreeing with you say , you do seem to over look the , and pardon the word , fundamental point , those who hold to the religious line base their world view on faith , and faith does not require reasoned argument as by its nature it is all about the miraculous ,your 3 examples all happened ,inspite of and laws of physics , chemistry or biology because they where miricales ... if you have faith .
the only evidance we can have about a miricale is that it has happened , and by the nature of any such event it can only be reported from eyewitness accounts from the time it happened .
HOWEVER the same can be said to be true for mundane events ie in the during the 3 week of the 4 th year of his reign King Henrey the VIII of England had a cold , and blew his nose a lot .. easy to provide evidence of the king but of a did he really have a cold at that time ??
and taking you point about defiance in the face of other "experts" .. thats what any religion have all was done .. as it competes vs other religions and creeds
the issue as i see it is when religion tries to use scienctic methods to "prove " itself ..and this is where it fails because its now using the wrong tools to make its arguments
" if god had wanted to convert people by the starta and fosile content of the earths crust , priest would study geology not the bible , "
™ Version 4.2
