Join us for a 15 min The Da Vinci Code chat weekdays at 12.30pm Eastern.
Imagine this fictional scenario: Timeworn documents are discovered in a vault, deep within a government office. Astonishingly, the documents paint a much different picture of George Washington than the one that we know. Written by an army officer, the mysterious documents claim that Washington was promiscuous, stole government money and never personally led troops into battle. In short, they tell a completely different story to the history we know of Washington.
Unlikely, sure, but if something like that were found how would we approach such documents? It would be na?ve to take the document’s claims at face value, ignoring all of the other historical evidence. It would be equally na?ve to dismiss them out of hand. So how would we assess their validity? Perhaps we would begin by asking questions like these:
If these questions are appropriate to the fictional George Washington situation, shouldn’t they be asked about other unusual new claims, such as those made in Dan Brown’s novel, or Michael Baigent’s new book, ‘The Jesus Papers’? What sort of criteria should we use to evaluate the claims Baigent or Brown make?
What Do You Fear?
What do you fear, and why? Is it holding you back from realizing your full potential?
>Watch
Do you crave destiny? (Part 2)
Destiny? Is this really me? Was I really born for great things?
>Watch
We are chatting in theLife chat room tomorrow at 12:30 p.m. Eastern. Come and find out more about who Jesus is as we discuss “The Life of Jesus”. http://www.thelife.com/thelife_chat/5.html&channel=thelife
I guess it depends if it fits your presuppositions. If you happen to be Dan Rather, you might not worry too much about sources if it discredits people you may not like.