Who & what are the demons ?

History is what can be verified with evidence.
================================Do you accept the fact the most of them can't? Among the 5000 written history of over 1000 nations, how much of them is evidenced?

WTF does this even mean?

WTF does this even mean?
========================Leave it there for those who understood to read, if it's out of your comprehension.Basically there is up to 5000 years of human history, and they can be from the currently more than 1000 nations on earth!Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

The only history that I accept is what can be evidenced. If there is a story of an event in, say Judea, for which there is no evidence, I don't "believe" it happened. I put it in the "unknown" category.

What you wrote originally did not mean this. Your original meant nothing in the english language. I do not think my comprehension is the issue. This is still just more gibberish.Are you saying that there is 5000 years of history and there are 1000 nations in the world and how much do we have evidence for?If that is what you are saying it is a false premise to start with.How do you get to 5000 years of history? Writing goes back 6000 years and possibly to 8000 years ago. The term history is general understood to be the time since written records. Prior to that we have prehistory.We have very strong evidence for the people of these prehistorical periods.Back to your statement. What we understand in history is what we have evidence for. There are extrapolations from that evidence, but we know what we know from evidence. Things we do not have evidence for we do not know about.Now to get to your other point. 1000 nations? WTF is that? Do you have a list? How is membership in these nations determined? Is it based on citizenship, genetics, language? Can a black man and a white man be of the same nation?

How do you get to 5000 years of history? Writing goes back 6000 years and possibly to 8000 years ago.
====================================Your stupidity is fully shown here. Do I need to know exactly how long history is in order to make the point that our history is long enough of which most of them is not evidenced?In fact the longer the history than 5000 years, the better it supports my argument. Moreover, 5000 years of human WRITTEN history is common saying or consensus, before that nothing or few things are in the written form.Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Boy you sure now how to make a point don't you. Still trying to determine what you are actually trying to say. I am assuming english is not your first language. That is cool but you should probably have a native speaker, or someone more skilled read what you write and help you because it is coming a cross as gibberish. Except for your insults of course.The part that is not evidenced has no bearing on anything. You seem to be making a classic mistake of fundies.Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but neither is it evidence of anything. If there has no evidence for the existence of an event in history there is no reason to think it happened. I am amazed that you think that your pet ideas can have some grounding in reality, because we do not have a historical record for everything that has happened through out time. Your whole premise is ridiculous.You are saying that since we do not know what was on Henry VIII's menu on March 23, 1522 then we should think your religious fantasies should be true also. Now doesn't that sound a little silly to you?I would still like to know more about these 1000 nations of which you speak. Really? According to who?

Hi Hawkins.
It is not hard to use quote boxes. Not a very friendly remark, and I am sure it is a violation of our rules.I could also quote you like this... or...

quote:

---

Your stupidity is fully shown here.

---

Just use the peek button at the bottom of this msg to see how it is formatted. On the left of your reply screen you can get help with dB codes or HTML. Preview is also a nice feature, might save you an edit or two.

Still trying to determine what you are actually trying to say.
==========================As I suggested, if you don't understand, you don't need to make a reply. Those who understand will reply.

How about responding to my post?1000 nations?
Absence of evidence?Or are you going to just move on to more gibberish?

He does not understand your English, and because of that he can't fully judge what you actually mean. Your actual content has not or barely been discussed yet.Fearandloathing said this before your post, and yet you still repeat it. Not to mention you're already taking the high ground and calling some people ''stupid'' for not understanding severe grammatical errors.

It's pointless to attack English grammar unless you got nothing else to say. As it's proven that I keep discussion with others without problems.

1000 nations?
Absence of evidence?
===========================1000 nations is a rough estimation of countries currently here on earth. I don't need to make it more precise to make a valid point out of this number. Got that?

According to who? How do you define nation?

But there is no assumption that God doesn't exist
===================================It's an insignificant figure in the discussion, why do you have to make it precise? To distract the discussion? Why don't you just provide a more precise figure if you could, i won't resist your correction in this case as this contributes nothing to the point I made.Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.