On 12/13/05, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
Well, obviously Christian literature would say that Christ was resurrected. I accepted that, and I asked for other verification.
But Christian literature and Christian beliefs are quite enough! Why should anything else be needed? It is clearly POV to say that Christians' beliefs are "bunk", however little they conform to scientific rules.
Consider this scenario:
The world was considered flat in ancient times. That conformed to contemporary rational thinking (basically, the world is flat since we can't see it curve). It was also wrong. Is Wikipedia presenting a point of view by stating this theory is wrong?
Yes. Wikipedia should never make statements of fact unless they are undisputed. All others should be cited.
-- Sam