You can observe the text of any religious book, and none claim to be written by anyone but humans. They can claim that they read something into the texts, or that they tell us something about divinity, but nothing directly.
that’s two categories; knowledge based in derivative information, and let us say ‘meta-knowledge’ NOT based in derivative information = belief.
Morphy - No disrespect, but so what? So what if he got some humans on the payroll to write books for him? The guy who pays the hit man is still guilty of murder. I’m with you on your conclusion, but philosophy isn’t about the conclusions. It’s about the arguments.
I have always held that Atheists have an actual legitimate complaint (not claim, merely complaint). I have never bothered to mention it because common atheists are so busy spouting nonsense. I somewhat stopped defending Christians for a similar (although not identical) reason (when everyone is being stupid, which side does one stand on?). I am curious, considering your theme in this thread if you can identify the Atheist’s truly legitimate complaint against the other religions … ?
The problem with that complaint is that it seems to be clearly wrong. The most scientifically and technologically advanced nations all have Judeo-Christian roots. They are also the most democratic, healthy, and economically prosperous.
So just to be clear : you have done this research and you have reached certain conclusions but you will only tell me the conclusions. You won’t give me the data, reasoning and logic behind it. You expect me to replicate your research.
I made a thread which shows in history that we could have been much farther than we are right now, had people not given into creating false answers.
Genius figures in history that invoke creationism/god to satisfy their not knowing. Reaching the limits of their knowledge and discovery.
So no, it is not clearly wrong. Just because a nation is advanced thanks to SCIENCE, doesn’t mean they could not have been even farther if not for obstacles.