Surprised by Ignorance: Cult of Dusty

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. The reason why many people like Dusty believe this sort of things is because they are under the notion left by the Enlightenment in the 18th century that is still very dominant throughout the Western world, particularly among educated people. Since the Enlightenment teaches Christianity is evil, they quickly buy into many anti-Christian claims like Christ didn’t exist or his stories are only copies of previous pagan gods. Its the same exact reason why many buy into the claims promoted by right-wing Hindus like Hinduism is a less violent religion than the Abrahamic faiths, is more inclusive and doesn’t make claims to single truths, and that Hindus criticize Christianity and Islam because they are supposedly “defending” themselves from neo-imperialist and intolerant missionaries, but of course, in reality this is nothing but a ruse to hide their ultranationalistic and incredibly violent intentions, but since Christianity and Islam have a history of imperialism in India, refuting these claims makes you look like a bigot or imperialist, all thanks, again, to the Enlightenment that left us this anti-Christian notion.

  2. When dealing with any historical discovery using archaeology, it must always be remembered that we are only able to uncover a fraction of what once existed and we are only able to understand a fraction of that. So no claim about someone or something not existing can ever be made by archaeology. However, the longer we excavate in a region or analyze written documents without finding evidence of the person’s or place’s existence, the greater the doubt becomes about such existence.

  3. Benny Greene says:

    Why is it that liberal scholars are anxious to bend over backwards in granting credibility to numerous events of ancient history (many of which are undergirded by the scantest of evidence) yet they obstinately resist granting virtually any audience to the New Testament writings? There can be but one answer: they are militantly biased against the biblical records, hence, reject their veracity—no matter how compelling the evidence!

    • First, let me apologize for not seeing your comment earlier. For some reason, it ended up in my spam filter. As for the comment, this might be the case if the person had reason to leave archaeological evidence, but that surely is not the case with Jesus. Almost nothing written survived the first century AD in Judea. We have nothing from that region and period to speak of and for good reason: the two Jewish rebellions in a century led to Roman reprisals that leveled the Jewish civilization of the period to the ground. Only some fortunate things hidden in caves (e.g., Dead Sea Scrolls) survive. There are no written records of the priestly class from that period and they certainly had the means to do so and did but it all perished. Unless someone of the period were a prominent enough figure to have their name in stone, we likely never will have contemporary physical proof of their existence.

Leave a Reply