Precisely!
Besides, the truth is not a popularity contest. If the growth of superstition is validation of its “truth” then what do these geniuses have to say about Islam’s growth? Or for that matter, that of the Mormons? The latter superstition developed and grew in an age of reliable documentation, barely a century ago, not 2000+ years into antiquity!
Exactly. Their other excuse is that they died for their religion. Islamic extremists do every day. They use one measuring tool and two different criteria.
Or for that matter, that of the Mormons? The latter superstition developed and grew in an age of reliable documentation, barely a century ago, not 2000+ years into antiquity
With the crucial (and most unbelievable) evidence (the gold plates in hieroglyphs) MISSING! The whole religions is base don a testimony of one shady character who "testified" that he saw the plates before they were lost...that's like the Ark, the most sacred relic, along with the 10 Commandments, lost! Conveniently.
The Fatima scam is a classic example of unreliability of "witness" testimony, especially massive eyewitness account during frenzy. Another excellent example is a British reporter who "saw" a British paratrooper on the Blood Sunday in Belfast in the 1970's point a rifle at him.
He swears the soldier had a red beret. But photographs of the incident (which did take place) show unmistakeably that the paratrooper wore a green steel helmet! The reporter to this day, despite having seen the photograph says his brain refuses to acknowledge it and when he closes his eyes he "remembers" a red beret!.
Anyway, unreliability of human recollection and eyewitness accounts is a separate study that points very conclusively that human "witness" is patently unreliably.