Josephus probably qualifies.

I'm surprised you didn't mention him.

Agreed. But I also imagine that there are people who could have seen Jesus perform miracles, and then seen him dead on a cross, and then seen him arise 3 days later. And they still wouldn't believe.

As someone else in this conversation stated, you can find dogmatism on any side of a debate.

That's why it's important that each of us consider all the facts carefully, when it really matters what we believe. Both sides tend to have smart people, average people, and crack-pots advocating for their position.

Seems to me a healthy theology does its best to understand each portion of the Bible as the author intended it.

That takes studying, plain and simple.

There is a contingency of Christians who believe that God intends them to understand whatever their lay understanding of a passage is each time they read the Bible. I can see the appeal to this, because they hold that the Bible is the Word of God, and so it seems bizarre to them that its intended message would only be understandable to those with a particular education.

However, I would have thought that people would discard that view, once they saw that applying such an approach to understanding the Bible has led different persons to radically different understandings of the messages contained therein.

I believe I've actually heard a pretty convincing case that the Genesis' parallel accounts of creation pretty clearly follow a poetic structure. Seems to me that makes a stronger case for the author(s) not having intended a strictly literal understanding.

The problem with holding up the "falsifiable" notion of knowledge is that it's self-refuting. It is not, itself, falsifiable. By your own standard, it has no place in science either.

I'm just saying that in this topic, you need to be careful about concepts that cut both ways.

Many Christians say the same thing about non-believers. Just sayin'.

The company is 4ormat, not Huddles

I'm really surprised they chose that name. I mean, who wants to pronounce "four-ormat"?

It's probably more accurate to say they did earn money by selling me updates. They've demonstrated to me that those updates of a value to me of approximately $0.

Good.

(since they need the phone subscription anyway, and yes the tomtom is probably "better", but 130€ buys quite a lot of gasoline, even at current prices).

Actually, I have a TomTom, but I do not have a phone subscription. And amazingly I'm getting by in life at least as well as the average phone subscriber.